Optimizing aggregation routing over a network

ABSTRACT

In one example embodiment, a method for optimizing aggregation routing over a network may include detecting that aggregated account data is unavailable over a network from a first data aggregator server, detecting that the aggregated account data is available over the network from a second data aggregator server, formatting a request for the aggregated account data to be compatible with the second data aggregator server, routing the formatted request over the network to the second data aggregator server, and receiving the requested aggregated account data over the network from the second data aggregator server.

CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

This application is a continuation of U.S. application Ser. No.14/036,948, filed Sep. 25, 2013, which claims the benefit of U.S.Provisional Application No. 61/744,398, filed Sep. 25, 2012, each ofwhich is hereby incorporated by reference herein in its entirety,including but not limited to those portions that specifically appearhereinafter, the incorporation by reference being made with thefollowing exception: In the event that any portion of theabove-referenced provisional application is inconsistent with thisapplication, this application supersedes said above-referencedprovisional application.

BACKGROUND

Advances in network and computing technology have provided institutions,such as financial institutions, the ability to amass large amounts ofdata related to the transactions of clients. With specific reference tothe financial industry, there are more than 10,000 financialinstitutions (including banks, credit unions, credit cards, stockbrokerages, etc.), plus many thousands of other participants who needaccess to and use of data from the financial institutions. Due to thehuge volume of participants, efficient structures and techniques areneeded to access, share, and utilize data from institutions, includingthe financial institutions.

Typically databases storing these large amounts of data frominstitutions that provide users with accounts are connected through vastcomputing networks such that account data may be accessed by, sharedwith, and utilized by enterprising entities to provide new conveniencesand advantages.

The disclosure relates generally to providing aggregation services overcomputer networks. The disclosure relates more particularly, but notnecessarily entirely, to a system for improved use of aggregationservices, whether in the financial industry or other industries thatprovide users with accounts, relative to account transactional data.

The features and advantages of the disclosure will be set forth in thedescription which follows, and in part will be apparent from thedescription, or may be learned by the practice of the disclosure withoutundue experimentation. The features and advantages of the disclosure maybe realized and obtained by means of the computing systems andcombinations of firmware, software and hardware, particularly pointedout in the appended claims.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

Non-limiting and non-exhaustive implementations of the disclosure aredescribed with reference to the following figures, wherein likereference numerals refer to like parts throughout the various viewsunless otherwise specified. Advantages of the disclosure will becomebetter understood with regard to the following description andaccompanying drawings where:

FIG. 1 illustrates an implementation of an exemplary computing networkthat may be used by the financial industry in accordance with theprinciples and teachings of the disclosure;

FIG. 2 illustrates a method to determine the optimal aggregation sourcein accordance with the principles and teachings of the disclosure;

FIG. 3 is a block diagram illustrating an example computing device thatmay be used to perform various procedures in accordance with theprinciples and teachings of the disclosure;

FIG. 4 illustrates a method for determining an optimal aggregationsource using operational thresholds relative to aggregation sourceattributes in accordance with the principles and teachings of thedisclosure;

FIG. 5 illustrates a method utilizing an optimized aggregation datasource that may additionally normalize the aggregation data so as toportray properly proportioned information to the end user in accordancewith the principles and teachings of the disclosure;

FIG. 6 illustrates a method for determining a first optimal aggregationsource and a second optimal aggregation source in accordance with theprinciples and teachings of the disclosure; and

FIG. 7 illustrates an implementation wherein one of the aggregationsources is selected manually or has been predetermined in accordancewith the principles and teachings of the disclosure.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

The disclosure extends to methods, systems, and computer based productsfor optimizing the use of aggregation sources in the financial servicesindustry. In the following detailed description of the disclosure,reference is made to the accompanying figures, which form a part hereof,and in which is shown by way of illustration specific implementations inwhich the disclosure may be practiced. It is understood that otherimplementations may be utilized and structural changes may be madewithout departing from the scope of the disclosure.

As used herein “user” could be an individual or an entity that canutilize aggregated information.

In describing and claiming the subject matter of the disclosure, thefollowing terminology will be used in accordance with the definitionsset out below.

It must be noted that, as used in this specification and the appendedclaims, the singular forms “a,” “an,” and “the” include plural referentsunless the context clearly dictates otherwise.

As used herein, the terms “comprising,” “including,” “containing,”“characterized by,” and grammatical equivalents thereof are inclusive oropen-ended terms that do not exclude additional, unrecited elements ormethod steps.

As used herein, the phrase “consisting of” and grammatical equivalentsthereof exclude any element or step not specified in the claim.

As used herein, the phrase “consisting essentially of” and grammaticalequivalents thereof limit the scope of a claim to the specifiedmaterials or steps and those that do not materially affect the basic andnovel characteristic or characteristics of the claimed disclosure.

It will be appreciated that data aggregators may be involved incompiling information and data from detailed databases regardingindividuals and providing or selling that information to others, such aspersonal financial management providers or others in various industries.The potential of the Internet to consolidate and manipulate informationhas a new application in data aggregation, which is also known as screenscraping.

The Internet and personal management providers allow users theopportunity to consolidate their usernames and passwords, or PINs in onelocation. Such consolidation enables consumers to access a wide varietyof PIN-protected websites containing personal information by using onemaster PIN on a single website, such as through a personal financialmanagement provider or otherwise. Online account providers includefinancial institutions, stockbrokers, airline and frequent flyer andother reward programs, and e-mail accounts.

Data aggregators may gather account or other information aboutindividuals from designated websites by using account holders' PINs, andthen making the users' account information available to them at a singlewebsite operated by the aggregator or other third party at an accountholder's request. Aggregation services may be offered on a standalonebasis or in conjunction with other financial services, such as portfoliotracking and bill payment provided by a specialized website, or as anadditional service to augment the online presence of an enterpriseestablished beyond the virtual world, such as a banking or financialinstitution.

Many established companies with an Internet presence recognize the valueof offering an aggregation service to enhance other web-based servicesand attract visitors to their websites. Offering a data aggregationservice to a website may be attractive because of the potential that itwill frequently draw users of the service to the hosting website.However, a problem may arise when a data aggregator's services aretemporarily halted, become too expensive for third party businesses toutilize or otherwise become unavailable for some reason. The result isthat account information may need to be moved by a user or third partyto another data aggregator or institution, such as a personal financialmanagement provider or financial institution.

It will be appreciated that the disclosure relates to data aggregationgenerally, but for purposes of streamlining the disclosure specificreference is made to the financial industry, although all industriesthat use the services of data aggregators falls within the scope of thedisclosure.

FIG. 1 illustrates an implementation of an exemplary computing networkthat may be used by the financial industry. As can be seen in the figurea user 110 may be in electronic communication through a computingnetwork 115 with a plurality of financial institutions 125 a, 125 b, 125c . . . 125 n. The user 110 may access the network 115 through apersonal financial manager (PFM) 111 that may be provided by one of thefinancial institutions 125 or may be provided by a third party provider.In order to make use of the vast amounts of financial data availablefrom the various financial institutions 125, a plurality of aggregationsources 117 may be used by the system to aggregate financial informationthrough an application program interface (API) 123.

As illustrated in FIG. 1, the aggregation sources may utilize computingcomponents such as servers 118 a, 118 b, 118 c each managing databases119 a, 119 b, 119 c. It should be noted that in some implementations,the network may be the Internet or alternatively the network may be aproprietary network system. The network 115 may operate according totypical networking protocols and security programs as is known in theindustry.

Additionally, as can be seen in FIG. 1, upon reaching various computersystem components, program code means in the form of computer-executableinstructions or data structures can be transferred automatically fromtransmission media to computer storage media (devices) (or vice versa).For example, computer-executable instructions or data structuresreceived over a network or data link can be buffered in RAM within anetwork interface module (e.g., an “NIC”), and then eventuallytransferred to computer system RAM and/or to less volatile computerstorage media (devices) at a computer system. RAM can also include solidstate drives (SSDs or PCIx based real time memory tiered Storage, suchas FusionIO). Thus, it should be understood that computer storage media(devices) can be included in computer system components that also (oreven primarily) utilize transmission media.

Computer-executable instructions comprise, for example, instructions anddata which, when executed at a processor, cause a general purposecomputer, special purpose computer, or special purpose processing deviceto perform a certain function or group of functions. The computerexecutable instructions may be, for example, binaries, intermediateformat instructions such as assembly language, or even source code.Although the subject matter has been described in language specific tostructural features and/or methodological acts, it is to be understoodthat the subject matter defined herein is not necessarily limited to thedescribed features or acts described above. Rather, the describedfeatures and acts are disclosed as examples.

Those skilled in the art will appreciate that the disclosure may bepracticed in network computing environments with many types of computersystem configurations, including, personal computers, desktop computers,laptop computers, message processors, control units, camera controlunits, hand-held devices, hand pieces, multi-processor systems,microprocessor-based or programmable consumer electronics, network PCs,minicomputers, mainframe computers, mobile telephones, PDAs, tablets,pagers, routers, switches, various storage devices, and the like. Itshould be noted that any of the above mentioned computing devices may beprovided by or located within a brick and mortar location.

The disclosure may also be practiced in distributed system environmentswhere local and remote computer systems, which are linked (either byhardwired data links, wireless data links, or by a combination ofhardwired and wireless data links) through a network, both performtasks. In a distributed system environment, program modules may belocated in both local and remote memory storage devices.

Further, where appropriate, functions described herein can be performedin one or more of: hardware, software, firmware, digital components, oranalog components. For example, one or more application specificintegrated circuits (ASICs) or field programmable gate arrays can beprogrammed to carry out one or more of the systems and proceduresdescribed herein. Certain terms are used throughout the followingdescription to refer to particular system components. As one skilled inthe art will appreciate, components may be referred to by differentnames. This document does not intend to distinguish between componentsthat differ in name, but not function.

FIG. 2 illustrates a method to determine the optimal aggregation source.The method is performed within a computing environment whereininstructions for performing processes may be executed by a computerprocessor. Additionally, as will be discussed below in greater detail, aplurality of aggregation sources may be used concurrently, or may beused consecutively, in order to optimize the aggregation of data, suchas financial data, email account data, frequent flyer account data orother account data.

As illustrated in the figure, an aggregation source optimization systemmay receive a user request for aggregated information at 210. Such arequest may be made through a PFM that provides a convenient userinterface to the user by way of a network.

At 220, an optimal aggregation source may be determined. In animplementation, an optimal aggregation source may be determined by acertain setting or a simple or complex algorithm, or by a series ofpreference criteria. Such determining factors may include, by way ofexample only, aggregation source, cost of the aggregator's service,speed of the aggregator, historical reliability of the aggregationsource, feasibility (whether the aggregator carries the desired type ofinformation), support (whether the aggregator supports the financialinstitution whose data is requested), business partnering relationships,which may influence aggregation source selection, last source usedand/or any factors that influence desirability of a data aggregator maybe taken into consideration. Determining the most suitable or preferreddata aggregator may involve assigning an importance criteria orthreshold to each factor and then finding a weighted average of theselection criteria.

At 230, the request for aggregated information may be reformatted tobetter correspond to the selected optimal aggregation source. Forexample, an aggregation source may have a dedicated API having fieldstherein to facilitate accurate and efficient communication betweencomputing components over the network. It should be noted also, thatsome implementations may comprise direct access functionality. Suchdirect access functionality is considered to be within the scope of thisdisclosure.

At 240, the properly formatted request for aggregated information may berouted and sent over the network to the aggregation source. Theformatted request may comprise identifiers and security protocols thatcorrespond to the selected aggregation source.

At 250, the requested aggregation information may be received and storedin memory that is accessible by the user and/or a PFM. At 260, fieldswithin the PFM may be populated such that the aggregation informationmay be formatted for use by the PFM. At 270, the populated forms may beoutputted to the PFM for use in presenting the aggregationinformation/data to the user in a meaningful way at 280.

If needed, the method may further reformat the data provided by theaggregator and return to the original request at 210. It is possible toobtain data from more than one data aggregator if the situation requiresit. In additional implementations, after the data has been received, thePFM or any other legitimate user of the data may then perform anydesired manipulation of the aggregation information.

For example, a process for aggregation data source matching and mergingmay be employed. The process of taking two or more sets of data such as,but not limited to, financial account data, and running an analysis onareas where the data might overlap, one example may be by a date rangeof transactions and then determining the likelihood of the sets of databeing in fact the same original source of data. Other data points, inaddition to any overlapped data, may be used, in the example offinancial account data, such as financial institution name, accountnumber, account type, account description or any other similar datapoints.

For clarity, a hypothetical example provides that a checking accountfrom Acme Bank may be aggregated from a source like OFX for a period oftime, but then that institution's OFX server becomes unavailable, and adifferent source may be switched to a different aggregator such asByAllAccounts. It may be advantageous for the old account data (from theOFX feed, which may go back years and already have customcategorization, tagging, memos, splits and the like) to not only bereplaced by the new data feed (which may only go back a month or two andclearly does not have the custom data) but to be merged with the newdata. An obvious problem is that the new data feed may not have the samefields available or may name those fields differently and therefore maydetermine that the new source is not just a new source for the same(identical) accounts at Acme Financial, but rather are mistaken as newaccounts. For even a more specific example, OFX may have called theexact same checking account “Free Checking *0278” where the switched toByAllAccounts feed will call it “Acme Freechecking “0278”. The systemneeds to recognize that the two accounts, although named somethingslightly, and sometimes completely, different, is actually the exactsame account to Acme Financial and the account holder (or end-user) anddetermine the two accounts should be merged.

A system and method have been invented for governing the determining ofwhether the accounts are in fact the same where such may determine aprobability of the accounts being the same using several key factors.The system and method covers any formula that may be desired to beimplemented, and are not limited by the examples discussed herein.

Once the two accounts are determined as the same, one of the final stepsbeing to match the overlapping transactions themselves, then theaccounts need to be merged into one and the same. Allowing the newreliable, at least up, or simply selected aggregation source to have allthe old data with the custom additions appended to the new data.

Therefore when it is desired to switch data aggregators, it is typicallydesirable to keep the historical data from the previous aggregator andto merge with it or append to it the data from the new aggregator. Dueto differences in the type of data organization used by the twoaggregators, and differences in the names of the fields of data, it maynot be immediately apparent whether the data fields match or not. It ispossible to look at sample transactions from the data from bothaggregators, such as the last 10 transactions, and compare fields for amatch. If those transactions match for a large percentage of the fields,then the system can conclude that it is highly likely the accounts arethe same and it can reformat the data if necessary and where appropriateand/or desired merge the data from the two aggregators. For example, ifthe system determines that important fields such as transaction amount,transaction date, vendor, etc. match for several transactions, then amatch is found and the data can be merged. This process can be viewed asa field-by-field match or overlay. It is possible to conclude that thereis a match if a percentage of the fields (or verification criteria)match, such as 80% or some other desired match success threshold. Theabove example illustrates just one use of aggregation information froman optimized aggregation source, and should not be considered limiting.

An implementation of a method for optimizing aggregation routing over anetwork of computers may comprise: receiving a request from a user foraggregated account data through a PFM; retrieving a predetermined formfor the account data corresponding to the requesting PFM; determine theoptimal aggregation source corresponding to the request; reformat therequest to be compatible with the optimal aggregation source; send thereformatted request to the optimal aggregation source over the networkof computers; receive requested data from the optimal aggregation sourceover the network of computers; populate the predetermined formcorresponding to the PFM; output the populated form to the requestingPFM; present the aggregated account data by way of the PFM to the user.

FIG. 3 is a block diagram illustrating an example computing device 300.Computing device 300 may be used to perform various procedures, such asthose discussed herein. Computing device 300 can function as a server, aclient, or any other computing entity. Computing device 300 can performvarious monitoring functions as discussed herein, and can execute one ormore application programs, such as the application programs describedherein. Computing device 300 can be any of a wide variety of computingdevices, such as a desktop computer, a notebook computer, a servercomputer, a handheld computer, camera control unit, tablet computer andthe like.

Computing device 300 includes one or more processor(s) 302, one or morememory device(s) 304, one or more interface(s) 306, one or more massstorage device(s) 308, one or more Input/Output (I/O) device(s) 310, anda display device 330 all of which are coupled to a bus 312. Processor(s)302 include one or more processors or controllers that executeinstructions stored in memory device(s) 304 and/or mass storagedevice(s) 308. Processor(s) 302 may also include various types ofcomputer-readable media, such as cache memory.

Memory device(s) 304 include various computer-readable media, such asvolatile memory (e.g., random access memory (RAM) 314) and/ornonvolatile memory (e.g., read-only memory (ROM) 316). Memory device(s)304 may also include rewritable ROM, such as Flash memory.

Mass storage device(s) 308 include various computer readable media, suchas magnetic tapes, magnetic disks, optical disks, solid-state memory(e.g., Flash memory), and so forth. As shown in FIG. 3, a particularmass storage device is a hard disk drive 324. Various drives may also beincluded in mass storage device(s) 308 to enable reading from and/orwriting to the various computer readable media. Mass storage device(s)308 include removable media 326 and/or non-removable media.

I/O device(s) 310 include various devices that allow data and/or otherinformation to be input to or retrieved from computing device 300.Example I/O device(s) 310 include digital imaging devices,electromagnetic sensors and emitters, cursor control devices, keyboards,keypads, microphones, monitors or other display devices, speakers,printers, network interface cards, modems, lenses, CCDs or other imagecapture devices, and the like.

Display device 330 includes any type of device capable of displayinginformation to one or more users of computing device 300. Examples ofdisplay device 330 include a monitor, display terminal, video projectiondevice, and the like.

Interface(s) 306 include various interfaces that allow computing device300 to interact with other systems, devices, or computing environments.Example interface(s) 306 may include any number of different networkinterfaces 320, such as interfaces to local area networks (LANs), widearea networks (WANs), wireless networks, and the Internet. Otherinterface(s) include user interface 318 and peripheral device interface322. The interface(s) 306 may also include one or more user interfaceelements 318. The interface(s) 306 may also include one or moreperipheral interfaces such as interfaces for printers, pointing devices(mice, track pad, etc.), keyboards, and the like.

Bus 312 allows processor(s) 302, memory device(s) 304, interface(s) 306,mass storage device(s) 308, and I/O device(s) 310 to communicate withone another, as well as other devices or components coupled to bus 312.Bus 312 represents one or more of several types of bus structures, suchas a system bus, PCI bus, IEEE 1394 bus, USB bus, and so forth.

For purposes of illustration, programs and other executable programcomponents are shown herein as discrete blocks, although it isunderstood that such programs and components may reside at various timesin different storage components of computing device 300, and areexecuted by processor(s) 302. Alternatively, the systems and proceduresdescribed herein can be implemented in hardware, or a combination ofhardware, software, and/or firmware. For example, one or moreapplication specific integrated circuits (ASICs) can be programmed tocarry out one or more of the systems and procedures described herein.

Some financial institutions may provide their data via multiple APIssuch as MDX, OFX, CUFX and others. Also, some financial institutionsalso may have their data gathered by a plurality of data aggregatorssuch as ByAllAccounts, Intuit, Yodlee, CashEdge and others.

In an implementation, once an aggregator receives data from a financialinstitution that data may be available to entities that can show theyhave a legitimate right to access the data, such as by providingrelevant security information, and or have an agreement with theaggregator to be able to have access to that data. An example of a partywho has a legitimate right to access financial institution data is apersonal financial management software provider (as requested by an enduser of the service). PFM software may enable a user to review accountbalances, conduct transactions, budget funds, pay bills, etc.

It should be noted, that because of the limited financial institutioncoverage of most APIs and aggregators, the unreliable nature of many ofthem, the data fields some are missing which others may have, thelimited time periods some are restricted to, and other factors, it maybe difficult to get the best quality data from just one API oraggregating source. To compensate for the above issues, a method orsystem is needed for determining the optimal aggregation source to use.

FIG. 4 illustrates a method for determining an optimal aggregationsource using operational thresholds relative to aggregation sourceattributes. As will be discussed relative to the figure, differentaggregation sources may provide differing levels of service attributes.For example, for certain types of account aggregation data, aggregationsource 118 a (illustrated in FIG. 1) may provide a more completetransaction history, while aggregation source 118 b (illustrated inFIG. 1) may provide the aggregation information the fastest. As withmost industries, cost may be a very motivating factor. Accordingly,aggregation source 118 c (illustrated in FIG. 1) may provide the lowestcost. The user may determine or select the service attributes of mostimportance based on business or other operational decisions.

FIG. 4 illustrates a method for taking the attributes/advantages of thevarying aggregation sources 118 from FIG. 1 into account whiledetermining the optimal aggregation source for any user request. In use,method 400 may comprise the process of receiving a request foraggregated information at 410. The request may come through a PFM.Additionally, the PFM may dictate the final form of aggregatedinformation that will be needed to complete the request.

At 420, an optimal aggregation source may be determined based on thenature of the request. The process at 420 of determining an optimalaggregation source may comprise: identifying aggregation source deliveryattributes at 422. At 424, thresholds may be received or set within thesystem for comparing aggregation source attributes andadvantages/shortcomings. It should be noted that the comparisonthresholds may be determined on the fly, or may be predetermined withina system that is performing the steps of the method 400. At 426, oncethe thresholds have been determined the aggregation source attributesmay be compared. It will be appreciated that the comparison thresholdmay correspond to robustness of account information received from eachof the aggregation sources. At 428, the optimal aggregation source maybe selected based upon the comparison made at 426.

At 430, once an optimal aggregation source has been determined, the userrequest made through the PFM at 410 may be reformatted to conform to therequirements of the selected aggregation source.

At 440, the properly formatted request may be routed to the selectedaggregation source over a network.

At 450, the requested aggregated data may then be received from theaggregation source. At 460, a form or storage array corresponding to thePFM may be populated with the aggregation data and stored in computermemory.

At 470, the populated forms may be outputted to the PFM for use inpresenting the aggregation information/data to the user in a meaningfulway at 480.

FIG. 5 illustrates a method utilizing an optimized aggregation datasource that may additionally normalize the aggregation data so as toportray properly proportioned information to the end user. In use,method 500 may comprise the process of receiving a request foraggregated information at 510. The request may come through a PFM.Additionally, the PFM may dictate the final form of aggregatedinformation that will be needed to complete the request.

At 520, an optimal aggregation source may be determined based on thenature of the request. The process at 520 of determining an optimalaggregation source may comprise: identifying aggregation source deliveryattributes at 522. At 524, thresholds may be received or set within thesystem for comparing aggregation source attributes andadvantages/shortcomings. It should be noted that the comparisonthresholds may be determined on the fly, or may be predetermined withina system that is performing the steps of the method 500. At 526, oncethe thresholds have been determined the aggregation source attributesmay be compared. It will be appreciated that the comparison thresholdmay correspond to robustness of account information received from eachof the aggregation sources. At 528, the optimal aggregation source maybe selected based upon the comparison made at 526.

At 530, once an optimal aggregation source has been determined, the userrequest made through the PFM at 510 may be reformatted to conform to therequirements of the selected aggregation source.

At 540, the properly formatted request may be routed to the selectedaggregation source over a network.

At 550, the requested aggregated data may then be received from theaggregation source. In some instances the aggregation data may beimproperly skewed or out of proportion relative to existing financialinformation to be used within the PFM. The out of proportion data may benormalized prior to being introduced within the PFM. At 552, the datamay be normalized according to the desired scale factor received at 554.The scale factor may be predetermined based on known attributes ofaggregation data from certain aggregation sources. Additionally, thescale factor may be determined on the fly based on preliminaryevaluation of the aggregation information received at 550.

At 560, a form or storage array corresponding to the PFM may bepopulated with the aggregation data and stored in computer memory.

At 570, the populated forms may be outputted to the PFM for use inpresenting the aggregation information/data to the user in a meaningfulway at 580.

FIG. 6 illustrates a method for determining a first optimal aggregationsource and a second optimal aggregation source. In use, method 600 maycomprise the process of receiving a request for aggregated informationat 610. The request may come through a PFM. Additionally, the PFM maydictate the final form of aggregated information that will be needed tocomplete the request.

At 620, an optimal aggregation source may be determined based on thenature of the request. The process at 620 of determining an optimalaggregation source may comprise: identifying aggregation source deliveryattributes at 622. At 624, thresholds may be received or set within thesystem for comparing aggregation source attributes andadvantages/shortcomings. It should be noted that the comparisonthresholds may be determined on the fly, or may be predetermined withina system that is performing the steps of the method 600. At 626, oncethe thresholds have been determined the aggregation source attributesmay be compared. It will be appreciated that the comparison thresholdmay correspond to robustness of account information received from eachof the aggregation sources. At 628, the optimal aggregation source maybe selected based upon the comparison made at 626, and at 629, a secondor backup optimal aggregation source may be selected based upon thecomparison made at 626.

At 630 and 631, once an optimal aggregation source has been determined,the user request made through the PFM at 610 may be reformatted toconform to the requirements of the selected aggregation source.

At 640 and 641, the properly formatted request may be routed to thefirst selected aggregation source over a network and at 641, theproperly formatted request may be routed to the second/backup selectedaggregation source over a network

At 650, the requested aggregated data may then be received from thefirst aggregation source and at 651 the requested aggregated data maythen be received from the second aggregation source.

At 655, aggregation information from the first and second aggregationsources may be prioritized in order to deal with duplication ofinformation. As discussed in the above example duplication may be foundwhen merging and matching accounts.

At 660, a form or storage array corresponding to the PFM may bepopulated with the prioritized aggregation data and stored in computermemory.

At 670, the populated forms may be outputted to the PFM for use inpresenting the aggregation information/data to the user in a meaningfulway at 680.

FIG. 7 illustrates an implementation wherein one of the aggregationsources is selected manually or has been predetermined. In use, method700 may comprise the process of receiving a request for aggregatedinformation at 710. The request may come through a PFM. Additionally,the PFM may dictate the final form of aggregated information that willbe needed to complete the request.

At 720, an optimal aggregation source may be determined based on thenature of the request. The process at 720 of determining an optimalaggregation source may comprise: identifying aggregation source deliveryattributes at 722. At 724, thresholds may be received or set within thesystem for comparing aggregation source attributes andadvantages/shortcomings. It should be noted that the comparisonthresholds may be determined on the fly, or may be predetermined withina system that is performing the steps of the method 700. At 726, oncethe thresholds have been determined the aggregation source attributesmay be compared. It will be appreciated that the comparison thresholdmay correspond to robustness of account information received from eachof the aggregation sources. At 728, the optimal aggregation source maybe selected manually or may be predetermined prior to running theprocesses of the method. At 729, a second or backup optimal aggregationsource may be selected based upon the comparison made at 726.

At 730 and 731, once an optimal aggregation source has been determined,the user request made through the PFM at 710 may be reformatted toconform to the requirements of the selected aggregation source.

At 740, the properly formatted request may be routed to the firstselected aggregation source over a network and at 741, the properlyformatted request may be routed to the second/backup selectedaggregation source over a network.

At 750, the requested aggregated data may then be received from thefirst aggregation source and at 751 the requested aggregated data maythen be received from the second aggregation source.

At 755, aggregation information from the first and second aggregationsources may be prioritized in order to deal with duplication ofinformation. As discussed in the above example duplication may be foundwhen merging and matching accounts.

At 760, a form or storage array corresponding to the PFM may bepopulated with the prioritized aggregation data and stored in computermemory.

At 770, the populated forms may be outputted to the PFM for use inpresenting the aggregation information/data to the user in a meaningfulway at 780.

The foregoing description has been presented for the purposes ofillustration and description. It is not intended to be exhaustive or tolimit the disclosure to the precise form disclosed. Many modificationsand variations are possible in light of the above teaching. Further, itshould be noted that any or all of the aforementioned alternateimplementations may be used in any combination desired to formadditional hybrid implementations of the disclosure.

Further, although specific implementations of the disclosure have beendescribed and illustrated, the disclosure is not to be limited to thespecific forms or arrangements of parts so described and illustrated.The scope of the disclosure is to be defined by the claims appendedhereto, any future claims submitted here and in different applications,and their equivalents.

The invention claimed is:
 1. A method for optimizing aggregation routingover a network, the method comprising: detecting that aggregated accountdata is unavailable over a network from a first data aggregator server;detecting that the aggregated account data is available over the networkfrom a second data aggregator server; formatting a request for theaggregated account data to be compatible with the second data aggregatorserver; routing the formatted request over the network to the seconddata aggregator server; and receiving the requested aggregated accountdata over the network from the second data aggregator server.
 2. Themethod of claim 1, wherein the detecting that the aggregated accountdata is available over the network from the second data aggregatorserver includes: analyzing multiple data aggregator servers to determinewhich of the multiple data aggregator servers is optimal for theaggregated account data; and selecting the second data aggregator serverfrom among the multiple data aggregator servers as the optimal dataaggregator server.
 3. The method of claim 2, wherein the analyzing ofthe multiple data aggregator servers to determine which of the multipledata aggregator servers is optimal includes: determining deliveryattributes for each of the multiple data aggregator servers; andcomparing the aggregated account data to the delivery attributes of eachof the multiple data aggregator servers to determine if a comparisonthreshold is met for a particular one of the multiple data aggregatorservers.
 4. The method of claim 3, further comprising: if the comparisonthreshold is not met for any of the multiple data aggregator servers,then adjusting the comparison threshold so that the adjusted comparisonthreshold is met for the particular one of the multiple data aggregatorservers prior to selecting the particular one of the multiple dataaggregator servers as the optimal data aggregator server.
 5. The methodof claim 3, wherein the comparison threshold corresponds to deliveryspeed of account data received from each of the multiple data aggregatorservers.
 6. The method of claim 3, wherein the comparison thresholdcorresponds to costs of account data received from each of the multipledata aggregator servers.
 7. The method of claim 3, wherein thecomparison threshold corresponds to an amount of history of account datareceived from each of the multiple data aggregator servers.
 8. Themethod of claim 1, wherein the request for the aggregated account dataoriginates from a user.
 9. The method of claim 1, wherein the requestfor the aggregated account data originates from personal financialmanager (PFM) software.
 10. The method of claim 1, further comprisingnormalizing the received aggregated account data.
 11. The method ofclaim 10, further comprising receiving a predetermined data scale fornormalizing the received aggregated account data for use in normalizingthe received aggregated account data.
 12. One or more non-transitorycomputer-readable media storing one or more programs that areconfigured, when executed, to cause one or more processors to performthe method of claim
 1. 13. A method for optimizing aggregation routingover a network, the method comprising: detecting that aggregated accountdata is unavailable over a network from a data aggregator server;analyzing multiple other data aggregator servers that are available overthe network to determine that a particular one of the multiple otherdata aggregator servers is an optimal data aggregator server for theaggregated account data; formatting a request for the aggregated accountdata to be compatible with the optimal data aggregator server; routingthe formatted request over the network to the optimal data aggregatorserver; and receiving the requested aggregated account data over thenetwork from the optimal data aggregator server.
 14. The method of claim13, wherein the analyzing of the multiple other data aggregator serversthat are available over the network includes: determining deliveryattributes for each of the multiple other data aggregator servers; andcomparing the aggregated account data to the delivery attributes of eachof the multiple other data aggregator servers to determine if acomparison threshold is met for the particular one of the multiple otherdata aggregator servers.
 15. The method of claim 14, further comprising:if the comparison threshold is not met for any of the multiple otherdata aggregator servers, then adjusting the comparison threshold so thatthe adjusted comparison threshold is met for the particular one of themultiple other data aggregator servers prior to selecting the particularone of the multiple other data aggregator servers as the optimal dataaggregator server.
 16. The method of claim 14, wherein the comparisonthreshold corresponds to: delivery speed of account data received fromeach of the multiple other data aggregator servers, costs of accountdata received from each of the multiple other data aggregator servers,or an amount of history of account data received from each of themultiple other data aggregator servers, or some combination thereof. 17.The method of claim 13, further comprising: receiving a predetermineddata scale for normalizing the received aggregated account data for usein normalizing the received aggregated account data; and normalizing thereceived aggregated account data.
 18. The method of claim 13, whereinthe request for the aggregated account data originates from personalfinancial manager (PFM) software.
 19. The method of claim 13, furthercomprising: analyzing the multiple other data aggregator servers todetermine which of the multiple other data aggregator servers is asecond optimal data aggregator server for the aggregated account data;and prioritizing the aggregated account data received from the optimaldata aggregator server over the aggregated account data received fromthe second optimal data aggregator server.
 20. One or morenon-transitory computer-readable media storing one or more programs thatare configured, when executed, to cause one or more processors toperform the method of claim 13.